standing in the rubble of city hall was something. -- >> the people there who had been in shelters for almost a month were very upset that the war ended. there what it finished. will live in shelters for three months. this will be the end of it, but his idea was that burns increase

. we rebuilt and we prepared for the next time because someday we will be the gateway to israeli commando lebanese will come and who will have dinner together. that is our goal. we want to be the gateway to the north. he was all about building. in rebuilding. planting. trees are a very big deal and is well. the only country in the world that has more trees at the turn of the 25th century than it had at the beginning of the 20th century. and everybody pleasantries. every time a turnaround. the first thing they do is go out and plant trees. more trees. that is what he talked about. it is a defiance of what it is also a spirit of bill the and life. people were sorry the war ended when it did, and everyone knew it ended badly.

they wanted to be able to have peace and live their lives again. that's what they wanted to do. >> you could watch this and other programs online at c-span.org -- book tv. and now on book tv, ben shapiro contends that liberals are guilty of bullying their opposition and creating an environment that discourages political debate. this heritage foundation event is a little under our. [applause] >> a pleasure to be here. i am a huge fan of heritage foundation. when town hall was part of heritage foundation never the first of the to pick up my syndicated column. i have a fourth book. primetime propaganda. the left. the heritage. for that too. also the editor at large of breitbart news. and that has the video locally

and los angeles after border if you have an eye upon you can tune in. pacific time. start off by talking a little bit about andrew breitbart. and the editor at large. a mentor of mine. i met andrew and i was 17 years old. he had just seen a column that i wrote. as he was wanting to do, he was sitting in a greasy talk of joint. saw the column and probably e-mail me at the time. it was just the secret other half of the report. and we got together, became aspirins, and one of the things that we used to talk about a lot because we knew each other for over a decade before his untimely death was, he used to talk a lot about how the west were a bunch of bullies, with the west really does is try to shut down the debate, how their sole goal is to avoid a solid policy discussion by trying to label us that human beings, racist, sexist, biggest, homophobes'. as his career went on andrew was

one of the most genial people i ever met. i don't know many of the men andrew. i am sure some of you did because when he died there were probably 100 million people morning him and 95 million of them had one. matt or spend time or have lunch with them we have to fight the bullies. that is what being a conservative means is fighting bullies. the more i got to look into. in the last two years the left side of the political debate is worthless. they're going to label us morally deficient some beings. recede in every area of american life. last week a lonely side for colin powell, brian williams and

president obama himself. colin powell went on the sunday shows and talk drop the so-called dark vein of intolerance that was running throughout the republican party. what evidence did he provide? that we are not left wing, that we don't believe in anthropogenic climate change or we don't believe that there should be redistribution of wealth so we don't believe in obamacare. if we would just move to let suddenly that would make is not racist. now, he should know how not racist our party is considering so many in our party were considering supporting and despite his liberalism, and he was secretary of state under president bush obviously. somebody treated very well by the republican party, but that did not stop him because now he's on the left which means that we had the bad guys. president obama did it in his inaugural address just last week also. he said a peculiar line in his speech very said that absolutism is not principal and he said that name-calling is not discussion.

he then proceeded to read avoid principal and be an absolutist and suggest that essentially if you disagree with them you want people in their twilight years to live in poverty, parents of disabled kids have no recourse, the port to suffer, black people to stand in line to vote, gay people to be treated unequally, and women to the paid less than men. he actually said all those things in the speech which was clearly the undertone of his speech. just yesterday dianne feinstein teeth -- dianne feinstein leads offer press conference with the pastor saying that if you're a good christian you have to be for the otherwise you don't care that kids are getting killed all around the country ends : essentials is. this is what the left best chance for. i'm going to discuss what it is we face in the other part of it is how we fight this because it is an overwhelming lead attempt

-- attempt but to shut us out and to count people into being quiet because it is much easier to go of your daily business not being called a racist, sexist, biggest come homophobe who hates every minority. to begin, they are the institutional bullies. most of my books are about institutions, university system, hollywood, media. the reason the right has losses because we think individually in the left things institutionally. whenever you see someone getting get sucked in boc leftists getting sucked in these conversations because they're too busy taking of the media. the left things institutionally. they won a top down dictation a policy. they understand something. because we don't think in terms of top-down control.

they think in terms of let's debate one-on-one we will take over the university system and use it as a club to leverage millions of young people to believe that leftwingers are bad human beings and we will force everybody who is mildly conservative out of hollywood in order to leverage our point of view down the throats of the american people. they do with drug to nonprofits. the combined with the government. look at what president obama adjusted and shifting his campaign into a 501c4 lobbying groups and opened the door to funding that lobbying group from the government president obama is somebody who really understands the battle, understands the fight, very, very smart and understands that he can use outside institutions like the matters, organizing for action, what was obama for america. you can use as institutions to put positions. he cannot do it as the president of the united states and combines with those institutions to push for the agenda and to silence people into what's

boycotts and secondary boycotts against anyone disagrees. we live in a country where few abide by the basic laws of -- if your film nicholson and you say the texas and california are too high, leaving, you are told that you are somehow a bad person, something wrong with you. a lot of people who left california. that is because economics exist. the left is nothing to do. when wendy says obamacare is going to cost money perhaps we will have to cut back hours and left response with if you do that we will boycott you, that is not a logical, coherent economic argument about one that if you disagree with the effect even of what obama's policies do with what the leftist policies do there is something wrong with you. you made a moral decision to cut back to and not an economic decision. the villa said the institutional police, there's several types of that love to engage in which is

racial bullying. it is the favorite thing. the reason is that the left philosophy is based almost solely and completely at this point and the at the that they stand up for victimized groups. everything they do is to stand up on behalf of some victimized minority. blacks, jews, gays, women. it does not matter. what that means is that if we oppose the policies by necessity the logic is we hate blacks, gays, jews, and women which is sort of the philosophy that they trot out which means that they treat people of our apostate as though they are something wrong with them. your jewish and conservative, as i am, you're not a real jew because that gives lie to their entire agenda. if he's a black man it's because he's not a good black man cannot get it being a black man. that is the philosophy of the left for it comes to race. the tactics are was interesting.

we all know they use the term racism far too often. the left says the you are racist. you think that maybe, just maybe if you check the name on the voter for maturity to make sure you're not voting for eric holder. use the media to blow this into the biggest thing that ever happened in the history of humanity and imply that all of america is based on the same racism because this incident and then say liberalism. the greatest case of the malpractice i think in american history. the only one that would come close is walter grant trying to cover-up genocide in the ukraine . the attempt by the media, very clear attempt to frame george zimmerman, obvious and

politically motivated, obvious what they're trying to do. what actually happened, a hispanic man was trailing a black man that he thought was engaged in possible criminal or suspicious behavior. he called 911, got that of his car. any turnaround he was confronted by a black man and proceed to pound this man's head into the ground until the shot in. that is what happened. there's nothing to contradict the account. the media turned this into what jesse jackson turned it as among white man tracks down black man and shoots him in back of head. he was shot in the chest. severely injured in that fight, having his head pounded against the pavement. the way the media played it is that george zimmerman had not been injured, stocking and for fun and decided to shoot a black guy for a reason in the cut the 911 tapes.

they took the tape in which he was specifically asked what is the race of the person you're following. he says he's black. nbc cut the tape. the cut of the entire exchange. he had to be prompted for the race. the reason that mattered was that they used this incident as an excuse to push liberal policy. they send al sharpton down and talk about how the sanford police to margaret is massively racist which is just a symptom of the believable race provision in america. has it does all the time. president obama and many others put it cy. this is just one black guy. it happens all the time. that's the kind of country we

live in. this argument rose all the way to the level of the presidency with the president's anger by and again he would look like -- son he would look like chair fun martin. von's the point that he was maks that essentially all black people are treated the same. this is a racist country and therefore if you don't believe in my political prescription that is because you hate me for the same reason, and black. there was also a secondary attempt which was interesting. a group called the american legislative exchange council. big group, a lot of corporations funded in the press clause i conservative principles all over the country. one of the things they pushed was something called the stand your ground lot. and you all remember the media played it as though he shot trade on margin, turned around and said, stand your ground.

it's the law. he did not know about this. i've talked to the family. the police did not cite him, free him understand your ground lot. the freedom because there was no probable cause to keep. what this was, this all out assault, the law that says if you're attacked you don't have to retreat, you can fight back, the whole point was to leverage against an institutional opponent of the obama administration. big fan of a variety, oppose many elements of obamacare, and so he had to be finished. the way to do that was to say that he was somehow responsible for this murder, this horrible racial murder that happened in florida, and by doing that they went to collar a change in media matters in these groups that we mentioned before and and then leverage a boycott against alec. so heavily boycotted that they had to pull off the stand your ground law completely.

think about it for half a second. one of the most heavily gun regular this is in the country. they had not written any of the legislation, a privately funded institution. did you see anybody being grilled about that? i missed it, but there are grilling the head of the nra and saying, you need to change your position. he is ahead of an interest group. it's his job not to change his position. the left expect that he is going to, and they demonize a mentally

does because the nra must be finished. this is a tactical maneuver. reseeding class warfare, the fiscal cliff. it turns out we don't want the best for americans. we just want to help rich folks. when it comes to sexual politics it is not that we believe in traditional marriage. it is not that we believe a child deserves a mother and father. it is just that we hate gay people which makes us horrible and inhumane and we are just terrible human beings. we see it with regard to god and secularism. if you believe in god and believe that your values ought to be expressed in the public square and even the most minute wait is because you are a thug who wants to hurt people. what this does is justifies the most vile tactics and left. example of this. i don't know how many of you saw my interview with peers morning on cnn, a very good example of this. what he does commit his tactic has always been to go up there and then say at whoever opposes a month and policy committee did this to newt gingrich last night

, lover opposes among gun policy is because they don't give a damn about the dead kids in sandy hook. of weil, reprehensible, disgusting tactic. it really is a microcosm of what the west as a regular basis and i cannot remember the last time that elected not use this tactic when president obama trots out 7-year-old still stand behind him as he announces gun-control legislation and although white house website videos of the same children clearly written -- reading letters clearly written by their parents are aware of the point. are trying to let me policy like a seven euro would. no guns, no guns, no guns, no guns. we're supposed to take at face value. the left tactic is to try of victims and they claim that we hate the victims so that they

can do what they want to do. the first thing they have to do is we have to frame our opponents. we cannot be civil. civility loses arguments. civility does not work. we have been civil for the last 30 years, and we have been doing nothing losing. the last time we were on civil was the tea party in 2,010 and we have a massive victory. civility is at the geneva convention. and uniform the geneva convention applies to you. that is all point to the geneva convention. once you get out of uniform then you're done and the geneva conventions don't apply. you violated the rules. if you're going to violate the rules you don't get the benefit. the same thing is true. if someone is willing to sit and that a civil conversation, the a civil as you want to be, be

perfectly simple. if someone is going to be a pierce morgan type, a bully, a thug and don't treat them civilly. it means that you need to save things to force them back into the mud a political discussion. if you notice what happened is i let of the interview. he said he was off the rails. then he said wattages say that iraq pushing the political agenda by implying that anyone who disagrees with you is moraly deficient. his comeback was, how dare you. [laughter] to which i said, that's not an argument. the fact is that to have seen your show many times and that is exactly what he does.

the reason i did that was twofold. it was fun. the other is that it forced him not to use that tactic because we are like -- think of the left like magicians. they don't have a facts, evidence. what they have a slight of hand, and they are fantastic. the best magician's you have seen. our job to identify tactics and said in the back of the room and be the guy who runs the magic show. watch the magic videos and, and we are shouting that the rabbit is a the bottom of the hat. i promise you there is a rabbit down there. it did not get there by magic. this is the tactic you use. fadel it is that take that away, it was interesting. if you watch the rest of the show after that interview, after i left you brought out a kid who had been paralyzed in a gun shooting. he started interviewing this kid because this is what he does, bringing out -- we can have discussions with folks who have been shot. we're all trying to figure out

the best way to prevent people from being shot. we have all intentions. disgusting that the implied we don't. he had brought the kid out between segments. two segments. first segment and said he is talking -- talking frantically. they're bringing up boxes of sudafed. they also bring up this get and put him in the audience. they are planning to smuggle the camera around. after i make this argument this level the camera to the kid you have been paralyzed in a shooting. poses the image contrast. here is this an guy who's perfectly healthy and again not guaranteed as i care about this kid who has been paralyzed in a shooting. because i said that he was going to do that committee could not do it. the standing of this poor person's wheelchair in order to push your point, and it is disreputable and despicable.

we need to frame the debate. i pulled the constitution's out. i reached in my pocket and pull a copy of the constitution intended to end. number one, it was fun, but i was sending in the constitution because a friend of debate. the vulnerability in the entire world view is he pretends to care is of the second amendment. he does not. everyone here knows and does it does not care. by pulling up the constitution was forcing the fess up. the like this are not. if you like this constitution that you have to explain to me why you like the second amendment and then held the gun control proposal that you're making it does not violate the basic philosophical injunction against infringing on the right of the people to bear arms. reconcile for me how you're pro huge gun-control and second amendment. he could not answer that. throughout the entire interview.

what i forced into be consistent on his philosophy, this is the third point, second point is frame the debate by putting it in the constitutional context he had no place to go. city of the philosophical inconsistencies of his argument is the third point. you say you want to get rid of assault weapons because they're killing machines. all tell you killing machines that kills way more people. it's called a handgun. you want to ban rifles without handguns. why is that? tune that care about the black kids? he could not answer. we would get back to that. the fourth point, don't get sidetracked. of magic is based on distraction . the point of the left in a lot of these debates is to get

people sidetrack bunton nonsensical issues. this was the entire strategy of the obama administration and now will talk about why mitt romney lost. the reason the left uses distractions like binders and big bird and contraception is so we don't pay attention to the fact that the economy blows. it's horrible. everyone knows it is and it's not going to recover soon. so let's talk about condoms. that was essentially how they ran the campaign. we cannot be sidetracked by that . always playing defense. because they're saying you're a bad person, the natural human instinct is to say, no, not. and not a bad person. wire you saying that? no evidence for that. our first instinct is to go on the offensive. the real racists for applying to things that are clearly and definitely not racist. he called something a basic

economic policy that has nothing to do with jews, that is an anti-semitic move because you're watering down anti-semitism to apply. and they're calling people races without any basis is like the boy you call the wolf. they're making room for real racists. we cannot be sidetracked. i mentioned the sudafed thing earlier. he took out six boxes of sudafed and put them on the table and then says, here's the sudafed. i was not allowed to buy six of these at a time, so why should anybody be allowed to buy thousand bullets at a time when there is no logical connection between the two policies. i could be against both policies, for will policies, against one of for the other and that is less said. if you want to talk tough talk drug policy will come back on. he had no place to go because he wants to talk about sudafed. as i said later. don't bring boxes of sudafed to

the constitution fight. which brings me to my fifth point, don't be intimidated. a very intimidating to be in rooms with a bunch of liberals. we're going to have to go into hostile environment. it is not a bad thing because it gives us an opportunity to commend people. don't be intimidated by the tactic. there is a point late in the interview where he says, the you understand how of surged use out? you are served, ridiculous. i'm happy to be escapement. not being intimidated is half the battle because it's easy to be intimidated. when someone calls you nasty names it's easy to be intimidated. the only thing you can do is fight back.

right off the bat what they do is change the topic. you talking about the fiscal cliff and suddenly you're getting a lecture on why you hate gay people. not only do you hate gay people, but here is the letter signed in stamford ronald reagan showing that you hate gay people. this is completely random information. what you saying? the answer is not to pretend. trichina know you are talking about. you want to talk about it, let me do the research first and we can have an educated debate on the issue. don't discuss things i don't know about and it takes off the table. if it doesn't and they continue to press for the look like a bully because it is a bullying tactic. you don't ask people to talk about things that don't know about. alastair a genius seventh grader

you don't ask them to do college calculus and if you go and say, i don't know calculus you're an idiot. that's the whole point. wait until the kids learn start u.s. and you can discuss the vagaries. if you look at what appears did, one of the things that pierce did in the debate is he took out a letter from ronald reagan and said he was for the assault weapons ban. no, i will admit i have no clue what he was talking about. that did not know about that letter. but he was talking of a was a different assault weapons ban. in any case, he pulled up this letter and i had no clue what he was talking about. it was out of left field. a complete blank and is said to my don't know what your talking about. i have a great year. he proceeded to read it to be commended the in the it and said so common that was the end of the point. don't force yourself to love

yourself and with people who you don't have to agree with all the time. you're an individual. you don't have to mirror the republican party platform if you don't agree with the republican party platform. you don't have to agree with ronald reagan and everything. a wonderful president but not a god. we get trapped into this too much which happened with bush a lot. with bush he would spend too much money and you find yourself debating why is okay. the answer is, it wasn't. it is easy for them to trap us with this. he tried to do it on benghazi. well, intelligence failures during the budget ministration. the answer is, okay, how does that justify intelligence failures. we can argue whether it's the same kind, if it was ignored, all of these things. that is in a relevant point with nothing to do with what we're talking about right now. don't get sucked into defending positions you don't agree with and are not comfortable with.

the second point -- sorry, the eight. , let the other side have the ones that don't mean anything. this is fun and it makes you look moderate. it there is a point where pier says to me, i say to him, everybody wanted -- i understand what your point is, why you want to take guns away from 300 million law-abiding americans. everyone wants to get people to have guns. no one wants that people to have guns. he went to -- and this is smart. he immediately went to the, should cover bad? i don't know. i said to my notes she was given a bad. you're right. you're right. i misspoke. responsible person responsible. you can see it he realized that i had not given them anything.

it was semantic. it is okay. it makes you look reasonable. the fact is i was wrong and i should have said irresponsible worse is responsible. good versus bad can be taken -- it's too vague. if the difference between a bad cold and hitler. there was something that i was willing to head them because it was not a win it is something that we can do on a frequent basis. obama trusts out john painter and said we just had a meeting, look at what of bipartisan -- lookout bipartisan manner. but, you know, he does not get away and out of that. obama as the visit is to come out and say look at what a bipartisan aim. we had a nice conversation and then i told him he was a jack as an interim out.

what a bipartisan guy a.m. his inaugural was, we will reach out to the other side to try to make things happen and if things don't happen and that is their fault. thank you. thank you for that bipartisanship. you can do that and not feel that. the nice point is try to reverse the polarity. and i was on, appears as the host, i am the guest. within three minutes i was asking questions which is the way to do this. george stephanopoulos is a mess of bali. nobody sees in that way because of his boyish, looks and youthful charm, but george stephanopoulos is a massive bully. in the clinton war room and he pretends he is an objective journalist so that he can ram his agenda that everyone's throat.

this civilian -- instead of going in he says i'm not objective, you're not objective. you're gonna sit there and let me make you look horrible. of am excited to be here, happy to be here, thank you for giving me access to you and your audience. before we get started afraid to my and conservative. you're a liberal. you're somebody who is in the clinton war room, somebody who takes talking points that i want our biases out on the table. at the outset people need to know that if i am questioning the premise of your question, because i'm being combative is because you're coming from the

opposite political viewpoint of mine which is a perfectly fair tactic. newt gingrich did this during the debate. you would go after the questionnaire. that is what we ought to be doing. they are running control. and if you think that the audience is stacked against you and you think it is going to be so stacked that there is no way to overcome it, don't go. not every camera is an opportunity. that every time that there is a camera out there. trying to pressure me into coming down for a rematch. he said to my want to have an even debate this time. this time, i tweeted him back. i thought it was one on one last time. it's about as the visiting get. he said to me is not going to be one-on-one. so i accuse you of standing in

your responses to bring victims here to use against me. that is we're going to do. that because you can't have a discussion with the victim's bill because it is gross and disgusting and disreputable. wellesz main tactic is running at victims as though they're experts on the issues. you can that debate with someone if there been people in my family who would die, might died of breast cancer. it would have been discussing a politician had chartered the yacht as someone who now i great expertise and the subject. just because you're victimized by a situation does not make you an expert. electron sea route because they understand an emotional argument, not a real argument.

you're going to lose that. i was willing to take that hit to let people know what was doing, but it's going to be stacked against you don't walk in the door. i was not going to go in there for an exchange festival where i am confronted with victims from sandy hook. they're happy to be there pinata it is their choice to be there and it is his choice to abuse the intimacies of. is the media's first to track these the will them. maybe the most important of all. body language matters. it really matters. it sounds trite, but it is true. he was angry. i was sitting back, open hands. some of that is conscious and sullivan is not. al was comfortable with having a good time, but when it comes to body language too many don't understand the importance of it, so you will see folks sitting for enhanced over.

john mccain has horrible body language which is one of the reasons lost. he always looked like he was either on the attack are about to get its act and there is no in between. part of that is because of his injuries. we need to work considered just six. they understand it. they've understand that all of this, what people see is what they believe. we would never lose an election. frame the opponent and a friend the debate this said there is another leftist alive in government who is going to tell you the truth about what they're really believe. dianne feinstein does not want to take some of your guns. she was to take all of your

guns. explain why this gun but not this kind should be banned. don't get intimidated which is the most important one. walked toward the fire. if you don't know something, admitted. number seven, that the other side have the victories that don't mean anything because it makes you look like you're a moderate and reasonable. if you're wrong, spit it out, admitted. if obama can admit up front, it's not going to hurt you if you say to someone who is right and an argument. stock gets sucked in by that paradigm. to let the force it to offend someone else's position. you don't have to defend. it is not your job to defend. you're an individual. if you don't believe certain things don't bother to defend because you will be good spokesperson.

number nine is reversed polarity. something that is worthwhile. now, on a fundamental level is because he is a bully in the right is not get that. think about it for a second. how did mitt romney tried to portray barack obama? nice guy, could family man, good father, seems like someone you would want to hang a western the cares about founding principles. tears of the constitution, that president. he succeeded in painting the picture. by the end of the election cycle people understood that obama was the first taurus out of default.

you don't think obama is the great president. he is not help the american people have nothing to do with policy. the picture you painted was the worst person since mussolini. a guy who's trapped stocks to the top of cars, forcibly cuts their hair of the kids. he put you back in chains, the type of guy who has binders full of women because he hates them, and agrees with taught a can that there are magic uterus is the reject the genetic material of rapists. the type of guy who really would not fire somebody deliberately for fun begins maybe hopefully there wifely cancer and died. of course you will vote for obama.

you would rather vote for the and who is not even the guy who is you. mitt romney did not understand this. he did not understand this. here is the logic. by portraying barack obama as a reasonable human being and then have brought obama portray him as a racist mitt romney's case is that a reasonable person was considering a racist. d.c. that logic temecula saying that obama was reasonable and telling him racist, so by treating him with civility u.s. lending credence to the charges that were being made against him on a personal character level. he cannot win like that. our enemies, and they are enemies because they're fighting against constitutional principles and when they engage in tactics like this, those tactics as castings. they should not be part of the rome of normal political discourse. the fact we allow them to come once you see what they're doing it cannot be an scene.

when you watch the media in the see the questions being asked to see any there is a patina of character assassination always. when david gregory is brandishing a magazine on national television he is saying, you don't care ed kids were killed in sandy hook. when you see barack obama saying these republicans don't understand how the economic policy works, what he is really saying is they stand for rich people and eight more people. unless we start labeling our opponents for who they are there going to continue to win. we have to punch back twice as hard. civility is not the answer. it loses elections. good luck on the moral high ground as the tide rises because the tide of liberalism is rising the only way to force it into retreat is not going to be sufficient to stand up for what is available.

the train is coming and it's going to hit us. the only way to fight that train is to have a train moving precisely at the same speeder faster in the opposite direction. we will there be a crash, sure. but at least it will derail them, and that is the whole point. thank you so much. [applause] >> we are glad to take questions. >> one of my pet peeves regarding the home public of bullying is the morning joke of msn b.c. we have a conservative who is

undermining everything that we to you know, making it sound that we are morally deficient people. what do you make of that? >> honestly. and we should be calling him out of that. if he wants to start acting like a conservative he can act like a conservative. in order to push a liberal agenda so that he makes a million dollars a year he can do that. those are the choices. he does not get to sit there and play honest conservative paul ripping out every conservative principle that it comes across. i like them being there. this is the difference. i want more of their voices heard because the more i hear of them the worst they sound.

the more there is the better it is. unless we call them out. anybody who watches al sharpton does this guy might not be objective, might not be objective. he might not be a criminal who incites riots. he might be that kind of person, might allegedly. i am happy for these folks to be here. i am not happy for the folks who pose as objective journalists to be there, and those are the real targets. don't bother with lawrence o'donnell. bother with george stephanopoulos. >> a teefor being a strong voice for our share conservative values. a lot of social issues in texas all of the country but in texas, very conservative and general.

i am wondering what your thoughts are on the social issues looking forward to the next four years of the next election. dewey take a federalist position and turn these issues over to the states to attract more independence? have a we counter that and still remain conservative in the values? >> abortion, no. the marriage is harder. the truth is, on a fundamental level we lost the game marriage argument for years ago. it is a symptom of us losing the marriage document in general. the moment we citizen kane for alternative relationships to exist in the incentivize and normalize and more than that once we change the definition of marriage to be not about kids, the asian definition of marriage was about children. now hollywood concept of marriage is to people who love each other.

once you're their year after a marriage. the fundamental principle is the same. arguments that we can use and the other side to that, we constantly run from this command i do not understand it. they run from the incest argument, the at the head of two brothers want to get married, why can't they. this is where the left its into moral indignation. how dare you compare a, sexuality the incest. you're saying the principle behind them is the same. of the definition of marriage is to people who love each other that it is any two people love each other. so don't get -- there are ways to fight that. on the general level i think that the marriage issue is a more difficult one. that is a matter of education. it is interesting. when i was 19 and i had my syndicated column, was 17th and 18th and 19th imagine that care that much about the abortion issue.

i care deeply about the issue, but is not just about that. the more you learn about science the more you care. on the one it really is, even democrats are stylus learn that their party platform calls for killing of 85 seconds before it enters the birth canal which is something that we should be harboring a consistently their the ones to extremist because we're not the ones killing things. when they say safe, legal, and rare, they don't even bother with that language. at the very least if you want it to be rare you want to set up social structures that don't incentivize that behavior. there are ways to go on the attack, and i don't think it is worthwhile to give up on social issues. it is worthwhile to every frame

social issues, and it is a moral imperative. mainstream politicians are scared of this. there is a character problem here. when they tried of women to say that we are restricting their choice and say that we're anti women it is not anti woman to suggest that you are not allowed to kill a living human being. and when you're talking about late term pregnancy by everyone's account, by the time you read eight or nine months this is a living human being. that is an argument that we ought to be making. we just cannot have any it's like todd a kin making it. >> another person. far back corner. >> james swanson. why the people like george stephanopoulos moderate the public party debate.

>> republicans are morons. in what world to you have a clinton act as the obama talking points. the contraceptive war on women question was clearly orchestrated, part of a broader campaign. i talk about it in the buck. two weeks later there were attacking. it was obvious what he was doing. as far as how he should have dealt with crowley, the answer is the same. make sure that the moderators are not hacked. and when he did that what he should have said is to welcome the wheel on the your liberal, what your biases showing in he should have explained what he meant when he said we said. they're plenty of problems with the way he handled the question. you cannot let the media walk all over you. he let candy crowley just trample him. that is painful.

>> you mentioned it racist, sexist, capitalist. what about is loma fauves to deliberately say -- what would you recommend that reasonable people do so that our government officials would be willing to attempt to understand the underlying theology. >> so we ought to be doing is people who cast around the term as lumber fell by generally the same people who want to be soft on terrorism just as a general manner and that is what we ought to be seeing, a smokescreen. it applies to things that have nothing to do with whether somebody goes to moscow. it's somebody who thinks that muslims commences like a racist, by necessity violence, you will, problematic, all of that. that is not what people mean. when you say that your read about the influence of the

muslim brotherhood in this administration like michele bachmann did in the you're labeled an islamic vote, how is that phobic. i am attacking the muslim brotherhood. my opinion is that i am attacking islamism. if they want to lump that then, that's a different thing. they think that the muslim brotherhood represents muslims. >> one final question. >> just a small point. it seems to me there is a tactical advantage still looking civil when you're in an argument. certainly romney, that is basic personality. obama generally speaking did not attack romney for using that

terms like racism. was his surrogates. >> it was all implied. the key is, we have to uncover their undertone, so when they say things. pierce morgan never said i'm standing in the graves of kids of sandy hook. he just hit it. he just implied it. i am agree we have to have the appearance of civility in 7-as far as it will promote -- possibly go. if you read the transcript of what i said, it was not nice things. when i lead off with that to my was not saying, and there were not meant to be nice. there were meant to force him into the bacon and you can do it , maintaining the appearance of civility. you can be a human being and say

things to @booktv messing we should allow there in ranting and raving. too often we mistake debunking what they're saying for civility. [applause] >> thank you so much. >> we have copies available, and i'm sure he would be glad to talk. >> for more information visit the of his website. >> let's think about how the typical american eats. 90 percent of the food budget cards towards buying processed food. 94 percent of americans the their children in a fast-food restaurant at least once a week. they are meant by hundreds, if not thousands of grants.

as they shop for beverages they might buy pepsi, gatorade, tropicana, lipton tea, sierra missed, and energy, michael phoenix, bottled water. if they're health-conscious they might buy juice for breakfast, by captain crunch, quaker cereal, and jemima, for meals and snacks they might buy rice are ready to my respited chips, chips, cracker jacks, hickory sticks, ontario's to more ruffles. what the consumer probably does not realize is that all of those brands are owned by pepsi. pepsi is the largest food company in the united states if you want to call those items food, and it is the second-largest in the world, or they might buy a nestle's

product, and that won't go through all the brands. the panel about 6,000 brands. 94 billion in sales. pepsi had 64 billion in profits because leslie is the biggest food company in the world, not just the u.s. basically in every subset, sector of the food industry we have just a few companies that are controlling all of those brands. twenty companies control the highest percentage of brands in the grocery store. of those, 14 of those brands control organic food. so big food is basically controlling what people eat. then we have the grocery conglomerates. walmart these the pack along with kroger, costco, and target.

walmart is by far the largest. one out of every three grocery dollars ghost of walmart. walmart has more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of all americans. if you wonder why have a lot of clout and political power. these really big multinationals use his political and economic power to basically dictate food and foreign policy. they speak with one voice in the side with the pesticide regulation should be, what nutrition labeling is, every aspect of our food system and partnered with the biotech industry which is also so powerful that it can basically by public policy. there was a report last year on the biotech industry. it turns out there are 100 biotech companies lobbying full

time. of those, they have hired 13 former members of congress and 300 former staffers of the white house and congress. the biotechnology industry has a lot of clouds. and wal-mart's is partnering up in some ways. one of the ways was recently with engineering "genetically engineered sweet corn. ..